Predictive validity of peer evaluation in problem-based learning: an exploration in medical education

In problem-based learning (PBL), peer evaluation is commonly used alongside tutor evaluation to assess students' collaborative learning processes and competencies related to clinical reasoning. However, limited evidence exists regarding the predictive validity of peer evaluation in medical education. This study examined whether peer evaluation scores in PBL were predictive of subsequent clinical practice performance and written Korean Medical Licensing Examination (KMLE) scores.

Correlation analyses were conducted to assess the predictive validity of peer evaluations, along with tutor evaluations and PBL written comprehensive exam scores, in relation to clinical practice course scores and written KMLE scores.

Among the domains of clinical practice courses, the skills and the attitudes domains showed the highest correlation with total peer evaluation scores, whereas the knowledge domain showed the highest correlation with comprehensive exam scores. Domains of peer evaluation had generally strong correlations with the skills domain of clinical practice courses. Peer evaluation demonstrated lower predictive validity for the written KMLE scores compared to the comprehensive exams.

The findings suggest that peer evaluation in PBL is associated with subsequent clinical practice performance, particularly in skill- and attitude-related domains. Peer evaluation may provide educational value distinct from tutor evaluations and written examinations by reflecting competencies relevant to collaborative learning and clinical practice. Based on these findings, further research is needed to explore the mechanisms underlying peer evaluation and to optimize its implementation in PBL environments.